Obscene amounts of money–billions–often translate into the ability to buy elections. But not always, as we saw in the recent school board election in Los Angeles, when the candidate of the Billionaire Boys Club was beaten by Steve Zimmer.

Billionaires don’t just try to buy elections.

They try to buy anyone who might help them or hinder them in their quest for power.

The Gates Foundation, for example, underwrites almost every organization in its quest to control American education. It supports rightwing groups like Jeb Bush’s Foundation for Educational Excellence and Ben Austin’s Parent Revolution. In the recent past, it gave money to the reactionary ALEC. It pays young teachers to oppose unions and to testify against the rights of tenured teachers. It also pays unions to support its ideas about evaluations, despite their flaws. It spends hundreds of millions of dollars to support “independent” think tanks, which are somewhat less independent when they become dependent on Gates money.

The other day, I reported that the ACLU had persuaded the U.S. Department of Justice to take action against voucher schools in Milwaukee that discriminate against students with disabilities. My source at the ACLU, who sent me the DOJ statement and the ACLU press release, mentioned in passing that the National Urban League had turned its back on the ACLU’s efforts to make private choice schools non-discriminatory.

However, Diane, if Bill Gates were to publicly recant, admit his misjudgments and mistakes and commit to a different approach—one based on verifiable facts and widely respected research, AND if he pledged total and complete independence and autonomy for the group receiving the funding…might you not rethink your adamant stance?

Now, I know that this scenario is about as likely as the NRA agreeing that weapons manufacturers should no longer be immune from lawsuits, but why not at least consider the possibility of Mr. and Mrs. Gates changing their minds?

as the devil himself said in “The Devil’s Advocate:” ‘greed is definitely my favorite sin.’ Some people have not read enough literature or seen enough movies to see themselves as the characters therein. As one blogger wrote, it would be nice if Bill Gates would take up golf.

I think if I were a member of this organization that supposedly supports teachers I would end my membership. Perhaps their members should boycott. I hope that I don’t find out that my teacher’s union is accepting Gates money.

The facts are that Zimmer won through the efforts of UTLA and the fact that Jeneen Robinson decided to have her voters transfer their votes to Zimmer for the greater good of all. A brave and great act by Robinson to prevent what I call the “Nader Factor” which is what lost the race in Florida for Gore. Monica Ratliff was a “Giant Killer” in the primary so they had to bring out the big guns again against her. They are desperate.

When it come to who buys who just look at who supplies their money. The Urban League is really a front organization in reality. If you cross your benefactor what do you think will happen? They are not the only ones. Follow the money.

We are not talking here. We are acting. We have just started educating parents, teachers and community on the “Parent Trigger” laws and the fact that they can take over their schools without the corporatist privatizers pulling the cream off of the top of the budget in high salaries and profits. When you do this all the money goes to programs and education. If you go to the Parent Revolution website and go to Parent Trigger you will see that when you press the “rules and regulations” there is nothing. How does this happen? By accident? No way, it is on purpose so you do not know and that is just how they like it. This is going to end and not by just talking. The day after an 8 hour meeting the first training session happened. Is that fast enough? The trainers are the California Title 1 Parent Union based in L.A. Contact them if you want advice at http://www.ct1pu.org.

George, it is a shame that UTLA endorsed both Ratliff and her unqualified opponent. Ratliff is a real teacher, a UTLA chapter chair, and a member of the representative assembly. Any chance that UTLA might throw their support behind her?

The Pioneer Institute in Boston has never accepted even a penny from the Gates Foundation. Nor have I. The problems in education are deeper than the Gates reach.

When the WSJ publishes an op-ed by two mathematicians saying that Common Core’s ELA standards are rigorous, surely something is drastically wrong with the WSJ editorial board. Do we have no literary scholars in this country willing or able to comment honestly and in detail on David Coleman’s bizarre handiwork?

When not one educational or business organization has hosted a panel on the quality and content of Common Core’s ELA or math standards, surely there is a profound rot at the top.

When not one major newspaper in this country asks experts in engineering or science to comment on the Next Generation Science Standards (people who know the content of science), surely there is profound rot at the top.

When the only people who are asked to comment on Common Core’s high school ELA standards are educational “policy” makers, surely there is profound rot at the top.

A heartfelt call to those who support a “better education for all”: take Diane’s request seriously; help provide her with concrete suggestions for ways to make her January appearance have a greater impact.

IMHO, there are a few regular posters on this blog who are very sharp in putting forth positive solutions and in pinpointing & highlighting the contradictions and misstatements of the leading charterites/privatizers.

I do not pretend to be among that few. But let me offer this. I remember one very specific point that Banesh Hoffman makes in his THE TYRANNY OF TESTING (1962). He spends much of the book trying to make his case against the exaggerated claims of the high-stakes testing world but admits that many [if not the majority] of his best points didn’t score big with the average person. Through trial and error he figured out that the best way to bring people into the conversation—and the Achilles Heel of the Lords of Psychometry—was to point out very specific instances of indefensible foolishness in the items on standardized tests, of the inferences drawn from them, and of the decisions that resulted from those unwarranted inferences.

For example, it causes the “nattering nabobs of negativity” [oh how I’ve wanted to use that phrase for so many years in a context where it actually applies!] no end of sputtering rage whenever “pineapple” and “hare” and “Daniel Pinkwater” are googled and brought up when attacking the validity and usefulness of high-stakes standardized testing.

I claim no special expertise when it comes to the big questions concerning content and teaching content re CCSS. For those of you who do have practical experience and/or expertise, what could Diane focus on that would make big points—and that would encourage people to go beyond the sound bites in a staged event to investigate on their own?

My thoughts are about the lack of developmental appropriateness in the primary grades and Kindergarten, especially the standard that, in their first year of formal schooling, 5 year olds are now expected to “Read emergent-reader texts with purpose and understanding.”

I taught Kindergarten for many years, including reading to children who were ready to learn it, and I can tell that a lot of Kindergartners are NOT ready.

At this point, it’s no longer a matter of, “Who has Bill bought?” It’s more like, “Who is there left with integrity that genuinely represents the best interests of African Americans, children, parents, communities, teachers and public education who cannot and will not be bought by Gates et al.?” (besides Diane, NPE and poor non-union educators like me)

I have the same situation trying to go on here in Bridgeport Ct with Paul Vallas and his consultants and his non profit group called Excel trying to take our parent groups out we are called P.A.C Parent Advisory Council and trust me we have been approach at for the same thing but me and my slate are smart cookies to we’re we can’t be bought out we are not no sell outs

It’s great that you are so committed to holding your ground! We had Paul Vallas running our schools here in Chicago before the rest of the country got him and we know exactly what you are up against. Ugh. Best of luck to you!!

Are these donations from Gates foundation conditional, in the sense that the receiving organization must follow certain agenda?

Surely there is some sort of screening process, and all organizations wanting the money would present their work in a favorable way, and I suspect there could well be conflicting goals between funded organizations? Or perhaps the Gates foundation only fund certain organizations?

Diane, I know you get so many responses, I am not sure how you can respond to all? I guess this seems like a fair place to ask the question. What do you think of Kahn and The Kahn Academy? My child’s teacher is involved in a documentary that the Kahn Academy is putting together in rural Idaho. The documentary wants to show how the Kahn Academy helps those that are struggling in math. They do not want the high achieving students to participate in the documentary, just those that are below grade level. My son states all the kids that do well in math by instruction from their teacher, hate the Kahn Academy. Any thoughts or knowledge outside of what I have been told from my son? I am aware that he was a hedge fund manager… Is that all I need to know? Ha.